Thanks for the quick reply.
I appreciated the view with the normal lens.
The quality was quite good, considering the distance you were from the subjects.
I was interested in your comments of underwater lights vs strobe. I always assumed that strobe quality pictures would be better than lights, but maybe that isn't true.
Strobes are hard to aim and quite expensive. Underwater lights are easy to aim, after all, they are on when aiming them, and although not cheap, they are less expensive than strobes.
If you ever get a wide angle adapter for your camera, I'd love to see them. Also, I'd love to see pictures taken with strobe, vs underwater lights.
I have an underwater strobe, but I am not sure how it will behave as a slave with the preflash.
I seems to work ok (above water) at 1/4 power setting, but doesn't work well as a slave at 1/2 or full power settings. On 1/4 power it works fine, maybe the flash lasts longer if going off with the preflash at 1/4 power. I don't have an underwater case for this camera, and probaly will have to buy a new camera.
I enjoy seeing photos that people have taken with consumer priced products.
If it costs several thousand dollars to take an adequate underwater photo, then I am getting into the wrong hobby. It seems you should be able to get great pictures for less than $1500 if you know what you are doing, and have some decent equipment. Maybe not good enough for the cover of a magazine, but enough to have personal pride in. (Actually, the pictures in magazines are often not so great. Maybe great wide angle underwater photography is simply impossible.)
This lighting issue remains mysterious to me. If anybody wants to add to this question of wide angle lighting with consumer priced products, I'd love your input. I'd especially enjoy input regarding slave strobes and preflash. I have read all the various posts, but haven't really seen an answer to the issue.